Section 18: Immunity from civil suit in certain cases

The Industrial Relations Code, 2020 (Act No. 35 of 2020) • Official Statutory Text & Plain English Practice Guide

Statutory Mandate
Chapter III: Trade Unions
Competent Labour Forum
Act No. 35 of 2020

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 18

Section 18 of the Industrial Relations Code, 2020 confers statutory immunity upon registered Trade Unions, their office-bearers, and members from civil suits in tort or contract for acts done in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute that induce breach of employment contracts or interfere with trade or business.

  • Immunity Against Inducing Breach of Contract of Employment: Section 18(1) bars civil suits against registered Trade Unions, office-bearers, or members on the ground that an act done in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute induces some other person to break a contract of employment, shielding union strike calls from tortious claims of inducement.
  • Protection Against Tortious Interference with Trade or Business: Protects unions from civil liability for economic torts, such as commercial interference, loss of enterprise profits, or customer disruption resulting from peaceful collective labor agitation and lawful picketing.
  • Immunity of Union from Unauthorized Tortious Acts of Agents: Section 18(2) insulates a registered Trade Union from vicarious tort liability for any tortious act committed by its agent in furtherance of a trade dispute, provided the executive proves that the act was committed without its knowledge or contrary to its express instructions.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. Rohtas Industries Staff Union (1976) 2 SCC 82: The Supreme Court delivered the definitive ruling that employers cannot claim damages in tort from a registered trade union or its members for economic losses, loss of production, or business disruption caused by a strike, affirming absolute civil immunity under Section 18.
  • Simpson & Group Companies Workers Union v. Amalgamations Ltd. (1990) 2 LLJ 553 (Mad): The Madras High Court held that peaceful picketing, distribution of informational leaflets, and lawful persuasion of co-workers to abstain from work are protected activities under Section 18, and civil courts cannot issue blanket injunctions restraining such persuasion.
  • Federation of Western India Cine Employees v. Filmalaya Pvt. Ltd. (1981) 83 Bom LR 423: The Bombay High Court held that trade unions enjoy full civil immunity when directing members to stop work, provided they do not resort to defamation, extortion, or physical obstruction of non-striking personnel.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

If management files a civil suit seeking damages for loss of business or an injunction against a strike, union counsel must immediately file an application for rejection of the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 CPC read with Section 18. Conversely, employers seeking injunctive relief must frame the cause of action strictly around physical obstruction of ingress/egress, property sabotage, or violence, seeking limited injunctions (e.g., restraining demonstrations within 100 meters of factory gates) rather than restraining the strike itself.